Rate the Hernandez trade

[mweb]

I think it is much, much more likely that the Reds had a payroll number to work within and that dictated how much return we got. Maybe they couldn't afford to increase their payroll by 4 million plus for this season considering their other obligations and plans. Perhaps they negotiated with AM to make it only a 2 mil increase in payroll and AM told them that he couldn't do that unless the Reds kicked in one or both of the prospects. That actually sounds much more like AM and plausible in the scheme of things IMO.

I don't think any of us know at this point. I think assuming AM ate more money because he wanted these two prospects is a huge leap. I'm also not real clear why it matters even if he did. He knows his payroll limitations and what he plans to do this offseason. Unless he is a fool, I can't imagine him blowing his plans on this silly deal.

Yeah, it's not like the extra 2 or so million is going to affect what he does this offseason.

[Sports Guy]

I think it is much, much more likely that the Reds had a payroll number to work within and that dictated how much return we got. Maybe they couldn't afford to increase their payroll by 4 million plus for this season considering their other obligations and plans. Perhaps they negotiated with AM to make it only a 2 mil increase in payroll and AM told them that he couldn't do that unless the Reds kicked in one or both of the prospects. That actually sounds much more like AM and plausible in the scheme of things IMO.

I don't think any of us know at this point. I think assuming AM ate more money because he wanted these two prospects is a huge leap. I'm also not real clear why it matters even if he did. He knows his payroll limitations and what he plans to do this offseason. Unless he is a fool, I can't imagine him blowing his plans on this silly deal.

Judging by what BB just said, this appears to be the case.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah, it's not like the extra 2 or so million is going to affect what he does this offseason.

But that's not the point...Of course that little bit of money means nothing.

I just hate to see us spending 9 million on production that we could get for less than 2 million.

But whatever, they wanted Ramon gone and he is gone...Its time to move on to the next move.

[wildcard]

I am having a hard time with what I am reading!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) OH posters are asked to evaluate whether the Ramon/Freel trade is good or bad. Well, first tell me what the trade is. I am not sure I know. Look and this from the OH front page:

Ramon Hernandez Traded to Reds

12/9/2008

by Scott Hoffman, Managing Editor

The Orioles announced today that they've agree with the Cincinnati Reds are to trade O’s C Ramon Hernandez for Cincy OF Ryan Freel and two minor league prospects.

The club also ended speculation by confirming that those prospects are in fact 3B Brandon Waring and 2B Justin Turner.

The 22-year-old free-swinging Waring hit 20 homeruns last season at single-A Daytona. He also struck out a staggering 156 times, but walk 43, drove in 71 runs, and posted an 813 OPS.

Turner, 24-years-old, seems to be the higher-rated of the two prospects. His low strikeouts, walk rate, and ability to hit the line drive draws comparison to current O’s 2B Brian Roberts. His only drawback is his lack of power, but his bat fits nicely at this position.

In order to help sweeten the deal for the Reds, the Orioles also agreed to pay $3 million of the remaining $8 million on Hernandez's contract.

-------------------------------------------

Well when I look at that I see the O's are paying $4M for Freel who due to injuries I project for next year as:

287 AB, 43 R, 4 HR, 18 RBI, 19 SB, 268/342/376/718

Under normal circumstances I would not even want that player on the O's team much less pay $4M for him. Plus the O's are kicking in $3M? That is 7M for the 9M. That not a salary dump, its just a bad deal. Now the O's are going to turn around a sign or trade for not one but two catchers because Wieters is starting at AAA. What is that going to cost? Maybe 2M?

Frankly I would rather have kept Ramon in his contract year and traded him in July, or when someone like Posada goes down with a injury.

2) The projected starting rotation even with the possible acquisitions is terrible. Guthrie, Uehara, DCab, Liz and whoever? I can't even guess at this point. Uehara is being described has a #4 starter. This in just ugly.

3) Now tell me. How will the terrible rotation and the giving up pursuit of Burnett make Roberts feel about signing an extension. I look for him to say he does not want to sign an extension. That means he is traded.

4) So if Roberts is traded, does that make Freel the starting 2b?

Sorry, guys. I am not encouraged by what I am reading.

[mweb]

Well, I think you are being unrealistic about the 12 years personally..Turner could have value before his arb years...I agree with that but that is hardly set in stone.

Yes, there's a good chance it doesn't get close to 12 years, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Turner could also have value during his arb years.

[Sports Guy]

Yes, there's a good chance it doesn't get close to 12 years, I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Turner could also have value during his arb years.

I agree...just depends on his role and salary.

[mweb]

But that's not the point...Of course that little bit of money means nothing.

I just hate to see us spending 9 million on production that we could get for less than 2 million.

But whatever, they wanted Ramon gone and he is gone...Its time to move on to the next move.

But that's not the point. The option of trading Ramon for 2 million dollars worth of players(including what we payed the other team) that would provide the same production(or most likely any production) was obviously not there. So it was likely either pay Ramon 9 million, which would be a poor choice imo, or eat a good deal of that money and/or accept an inflated contract like Freel's to get rid of him. So either way, quite a bit more than 2 million dollars would have to be spent.

And again, we don't know about that 9 million. As of now it's between 5.5-7M plus a replacement catcher, which I think is being over emphasized in this because that would be needed anyway assuming Ramon was traded, which almost everyone seemed to have wanted. And based on AM's comments, there's a good chance that catcher doesn't cost much anyway.

[Moose Milligan]

The 22-year-old free-swinging Waring hit 20 homeruns last season at single-A Daytona. He also struck out a staggering 156 times, but walk 43, drove in 71 runs, and posted an 813 OPS.

Sounds like a poor mans Brandon Wood.

[Sports Guy]

According to the Sun, we sent approximately 2 million.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-hernandez1209,0,4182947.story

[hoosiers]

I was a big advocate of signing Ramon. He put up a strong first year and then started to show some cracks to his game. I was never too upset with Ramon when the "lack of hustle" complaints spread. I'd prefer the guy who people think is hustling his tail off, but Ramon is who he is.

Now, many here wanted to Ramon gone and it appears there was not much of a market for him - based on how much $ we absorbed. Ramon's salary was a sunk cost and if you wanted him gone, then you probably had to consider eating most of that salary. We were never going to land a top 5 prospect for Ramon this offseason given the lack of demand for his services.

Guess what - this is what market deals look like. It is what it took to move Ramon to the most interested party. No one wanted to pick up more salary and no one offered better prospects.

Should we have kept him? It's a legitimate question and a legitimate opinion to say "Yes". Is this deal likely to bite us in the butt? Could Ramon get inspired and play quality ball at catcher for three months and have more value at the deadline? That's the downside, and that's a downside I am comfortable with.

Ramon's salary was a sunk cost. For that same cost, we will remove Ramon from the team, provide an easy opening for Wieters and obtain Freel and two prospects. I like the move.

[mweb]

I was a big advocate of signing Ramon. He put up a strong first year and then started to show some cracks to his game. I was never too upset with Ramon when the "lack of hustle" complaints spread. I'd prefer the guy who people think is hustling his tail off, but Ramon is who he is.

Now, many here wanted to Ramon gone and it appears there was not much of a market for him - based on how much $ we absorbed. Ramon's salary was a sunk cost and if you wanted him gone, then you probably had to consider eating most of that salary. We were never going to land a top 5 prospect for Ramon this offseason given the lack of demand for his services.

Guess what - this is what market deals look like. It is what it took to move Ramon to the most interested party. No one wanted to pick up more salary and no one offered better prospects.

Should we have kept him? It's a legitimate question and a legitimate opinion to say "Yes". Is this deal likely to bite us in the butt? Could Ramon get inspired and play quality ball at catcher for three months and have more value at the deadline? That's the downside, and that's a downside I am comfortable with.

Ramon's salary was a sunk cost. For that same cost, we will remove Ramon from the team, provide an easy opening for Wieters and obtain Freel and two prospects. I like the move.

An upside if we kept him that very few on here would have liked because it would have taken ab's away from Wieters.

[oriole_way]

I gave it an A, although I wouldn't use the word excellent. I would use the adjective good, but I certainly didn't expect expect a little more either.

Ramon seems like he is at the end of the line, so getting a prospect that could actually be a decent 2nd baseman one day is more than I expected.

And who knows, maybe Freel can be an immediate stopgap at 2B if Roberts is traded.

[Frobby]

I know it may sound crazy but to me, that makes a big difference.

I know in the scheme of things, that isn't a lot of money...but that's not what i am really worried about.

It is just the idea of how we would be spending the money.

Lets look at this for a second:

1) Paying Freel 4 million...I agree with your take on Freel but I think he is still way overpaid...I bet we could get a similar player for under 1 million.

2) Pay a new catcher whatever salary...As I said, if it is a guy that is making under 1 million, this idea becomes better...If we are paying someone 2-3 million, its not a good idea.

3) Pay them an additional 3 million to take Ramon back.

So, if we are paying out 3 million + 4 million for Freel + 2-3 million for a new catcher, that isn't a good use of money...We could get similar players for way way less.

According to the Sun, we sent approximately 2 million.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/baseball/bal-hernandez1209,0,4182947.story

Well when I look at that I see the O's are paying $4M for Freel who due to injuries I project for next year as:

287 AB, 43 R, 4 HR, 18 RBI, 19 SB, 268/342/376/718

Under normal circumstances I would not even want that player on the O's team much less pay $4M for him. Plus the O's are kicking in $3M? That is 7M for the 9M. That not a salary dump, its just a bad deal. Now the O's are going to turn around a sign or trade for not one but two catchers because Wieters is starting at AAA. What is that going to cost? Maybe 2M?

Frankly I would rather have kept Ramon in his contract year and traded him in July, or when someone like Posada goes down with a injury.

Well, I agree with SG that the amount of money we kicked in affects how well I like this trade. I'm still not clear whether it's $1.5 mm, $2 mm of $3 mm. The less it is, the better the trade was.

That said, the key thing was to get Ramon out of here. Contrary to what wildcard said here, there is no way it would have been good to keep Ramon here until July. That would have created a very messy situation if we decided to bring Wieters up (and personally, I want him up sooner rather than later). And what would we have gotten in exchange? We already know - the equivalent of Adam Stern. I'd much rather get someone in here who undertands that his main job is to be Crash Davis and mentor the new stud on the block. That would never have been Ramon.

Of course I'd never pay a guy like Freel $4 mm on his own, but that (plus what we kicked in) is the cost of ridding ourselves of a $9 mm obligation. Freel's useful, Turner could be starting at 2B in a year or could take over the utility job if BRob stays, and Waring is at least interesting.